So there's a strong performance. My point is, of course, that the people who invested in income trusts over that period of time obtained very significant double-digit yields, is that not correct? When people throw around this $35 billion loss, aren't they ignoring the fact that people made $100 billion in the previous four years, assuming they were invested for that four-year period? Is that right?
On January 30th, 2007. See this statement in context.